Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, for marketing people, it matters . . . b/c figuring out WHY some event or place does or does not appeal to various groups means figuring out how to target them for marketing, in order to increase their participation.
I think this is less a matter of color than it is of disposable time and income. Most of the working class and damn near everybody, except the really wealthy business owners with government contracts, on welfare do not have the money to get to the big western parks. The people that have both time and money are mostly retired folks in decent pensions. Overwhelmingly these are white.
FWIW - Yosemite and most of the rest of the big Western Parks were set up as "Destination Parks" to attract relatively affluent Eastern middle class people to take the train to the West. This provided much revenue for the railroad companies and the park concessionaires. The only colored people on these trains and in these hotels were the servants and maids. Not much has changed.
What kind of a thread is that? people of color? black I assume, why would they go to a Western park? do you see any at the Utah Basketball games? where are they? They are in the White House...LOL.
Why assume the appreciation of the beauty of National Parks is racially determined? I don't.
I figure the demographics of park users is mostly determined by spare money and time. The people with these are retired people on a decent union pension. Most of these are currently white. This will change as the current workforce ages and the different racial demographic retires with enough time and money to visit these parks.
BTW - The Saugus Iron Works National Park in Saugus, Massachusetts is a fascinating place. Try imagining an economy without iron nails or needles.
This is hilarious.
We are supposed to live in a "color blind" society, yet, it truly matters about the % of (fill in race) do.
What would be the benefit if they showed up to more parks?
What does it matter if they just have no interest in these things?
What's suppose to happen? Should they be given money for showing up? Oh no, I probably just gave some extreme over the top basket case liberal a good idea, lmao :cries:
Stuff like this makes 0 sense to me.
Some people do things, some people don't.
Judging from that map, most of those parks are not located near the areas where the bulk of colored people tend to live. So they would have to travel much farther to get to Wyoming or wherever. This in turn means they would have to spend more time and money on such a trip, which colored people are somewhat less likely to have available.
And most minorities simply comprise extremely urban people, which might have to do with US history...
We went on a cross-country camping trip once and when we came back my husband was talking about the trip with a black co-worker. And the co-worker said he wished he could do that. My husband says why don't you to which the black guy replied: "Are you kidding! Black people can't just roam around hitting little towns across the country like that. You never know when you're going to drive into an area where they'd just as soon cut off your balls as to look at you. White people can go just about anywhere, blacks can't."
U.S. has grown more diverse, but park visitors remain overwhelmingly white.
The National Park system is often called “America’s Best Idea,” but according to a new report, it remains more like terra incognita for many people of color.
Who cares? This is the kind of stupidity that our society is focuesd on these days? There are several National Parks here in Masachusetts. I actually used to drive by the site where Paul Revere was captured by the British every day. Many of these parks are in very easy reach using public transportation. The people who want to go there will go there. Why are we concerned with what color they are?
Cause the park system wants as much participation as possible - and if a segment of society is not taking advantage of these parks . . . then the thought is - do we need to market to them differently so they will see national parks as a viable vacation option? AND SPEND THEIR MONEY ON NATIONAL PARKS admissions and fees.
More participation, more $$$$ to offset operational costs. Plain and simple.
We went on a cross-country camping trip once and when we came back my husband was talking about the trip with a black co-worker. And the co-worker said he wished he could do that. My husband says why don't you to which the black guy replied: "Are you kidding! Black people can't just roam around hitting little towns across the country like that. You never know when you're going to drive into an area where they'd just as soon cut off your balls as to look at you. White people can go just about anywhere, blacks can't."
Hm, not so sure whether that is just his fear, or reality
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
